Is Equation a Total Derivative?

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around determining whether a given equation represents a total derivative. The equation in question is expressed in terms of differentials involving the variables x and y, specifically focusing on the relationship between dz, dx, and dy.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Assumption checking, Mathematical reasoning

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants explore the conditions under which the equation could be a total derivative, examining the symmetry of second derivatives and the existence of a function F(x,y) that satisfies the equation. Questions arise about the validity of assumptions made during differentiation and the implications of mixed second derivatives.

Discussion Status

Some participants have provided insights and alternative approaches to the problem, while others have expressed uncertainty about their own reasoning. There is an ongoing exploration of the relationships between the variables and the conditions necessary for the equation to represent a total derivative.

Contextual Notes

Participants are working under the constraints of a homework assignment, which may limit the information available and the methods they can employ. The discussion includes attempts to derive expressions for parameters alpha and beta that would satisfy the total derivative condition.

Lindsayyyy
Messages
215
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



Is the following equation a total derivative?

[tex]dz = 2ln(y)dx+{\frac x y}dy[/tex]

Homework Equations


-


The Attempt at a Solution



I would say no. I tried it with the symmetry of the second derivatives.

[tex]2ln(y)[/tex] is [tex]{\frac {\partial z} {\partial x}}[/tex]

when I derivate it now and say y is my variable I get:

[tex]{\frac {\partial z} {\partial y}}=\frac 2 y[/tex]

same for the other expression

[tex]{\frac {\partial z} {\partial y}}=\frac x y[/tex]

[tex]{\frac {\partial z} {\partial x}}=\frac 1 y[/tex]


so they are different => no totale derivative. Am I right or where did I do mistakes?

Thanks for the help
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Hi Lindsayyyy! :wink:

That's completelyyyy right. :smile:

(just to check, I like to differentiate the obvious possibility, xlny, and that gives lnydx + xdy/y, which doesn't match)
 
Thank you very much:smile:
 
Just to put my oar in, if that were a total derivative, there would exist a function, F(x,y) such that
[tex]\frac{dF}= \frac{\partial F}{\partial x}dx+ \frac{\partial F}{\partial y}dy[/tex]
[tex]\frac{dF}= 2 ln(y)dx+ \frac{x}{y}dy[/tex]
..
So we must have [itex]\partial F/\partial x= 2 ln(y)[/itex] so [itex]F= 2x ln(y)+ \phi(y)[/itex] where [itex]\phi(y)[/itex] can be any differentiable function of y only.

From that [itex]\partial F/\partial y= 2x/y+ \phi'(y)[/itex] and that must be equal to [itex]x/y[/itex]: [itex]2x/y+ \phi'(y)= x/y[/itex] so [itex]\phi'(y)= -x/y[/itex] which is impossible since [itex]\phi'(y)[/itex] is not a function of y.

Note the "mixed second derivatives". If [itex]\partial F/\partial y= x/y+ \phi'(y)[/itex]
then [itex]\partial^2 F/\partial x\partial y= 1/y[/itex] and if [itex]\partial F/\partial x= 2ln(y)[/itex] then [itex]\partial^2 F/\partial y\partial x= 2/y[/itex]. Those mixed second derivatives should be the same and that was what you were checking.
 
your solution is way more elegant than mine :smile:

I have another problem:

[tex]x^{\alpha}y^{\beta}(2ln(y)dx+{\frac x y}dy)[/tex] is given. I shall find alpha and beta that the given expression is a total derivative.

My approach:

I found [tex]{ \frac {\partial^{2}z} {\partial x \partial y}}=2\beta x^{\alpha}y^{\beta -1}ln(y)+{\frac 1 y}2x^{\alpha}y^{\beta}[/tex]

and
[tex]{ \frac {\partial^{2}z} {\partial y \partial x}}=\alpha x^{\alpha -1}y^{\beta}{\frac x y}+{\frac {x^{\alpha}y^{\beta}} y}[/tex]

I though I could equate them and solve the equation to get an expression for alpha and beta. But my problem is I can easily cancel some terms with potential rules like y^a-1=y^a/y etc.

And I get to the euqation:

[tex]2\beta lny+2 = \alpha+1[/tex]

is my approach wrong, where are my mistakes? If I was right thus far, how should I go on?

Thanks for your help
 
Lindsayyyy said:
...
And I get to the euqation:

[tex]2\beta lny+2 = \alpha+1[/tex]

is my approach wrong, where are my mistakes? If I was right thus far, how should I go on?

Thanks for your help
There is no y on the right hand side, so what must β be ?
 
fail

[tex]\beta =0 \alpha =1[/tex]

thanks, I'm blind, I know it's a bit too much and insolent to ask but you haven't calculated it by yourself in order to test if I was right until the last step, have you?

Thanks for your help

edit:

nevermind, I'm tired^^
I haven't thought about just to put it in and derive it haha. It works. thanks
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K